Abstract
Abstract. The feedback between climate and the terrestrial carbon cycle will be a key determinant of the dynamics of the Earth System (the thin layer that contains and supports life) over the coming decades and centuries. However, Earth System Model projections of the terrestrial carbon-balance vary widely over these timescales. This is largely due to differences in their terrestrial carbon cycle models. A major goal in biogeosciences is therefore to improve understanding of the terrestrial carbon cycle to enable better constrained projections. Utilising empirical data to constrain and assess component processes in terrestrial carbon cycle models will be essential to achieving this goal. We used a new model construction method to data-constrain all parameters of all component processes within a global terrestrial carbon model, employing as data constraints a collection of 12 empirical data sets characterising global patterns of carbon stocks and flows. Our goals were to assess the climate dependencies inferred for all component processes, assess whether these were consistent with current knowledge and understanding, assess the importance of different data sets and the model structure for inferring those dependencies, assess the predictive accuracy of the model and ultimately to identify a methodology by which alternative component models could be compared within the same framework in the future. Although formulated as differential equations describing carbon fluxes through plant and soil pools, the model was fitted assuming the carbon pools were in states of dynamic equilibrium (input rates equal output rates). Thus, the parameterised model is of the equilibrium terrestrial carbon cycle. All but 2 of the 12 component processes to the model were inferred to have strong climate dependencies, although it was not possible to data-constrain all parameters, indicating some potentially redundant details. Similar climate dependencies were obtained for most processes, whether inferred individually from their corresponding data sets or using the full terrestrial carbon model and all available data sets, indicating a strong overall consistency in the information provided by different data sets under the assumed model formulation. A notable exception was plant mortality, in which qualitatively different climate dependencies were inferred depending on the model formulation and data sets used, highlighting this component as the major structural uncertainty in the model. All but two component processes predicted empirical data better than a null model in which no climate dependency was assumed. Equilibrium plant carbon was predicted especially well (explaining around 70% of the variation in the withheld evaluation data). We discuss the advantages of our approach in relation to advancing our understanding of the carbon cycle and enabling Earth System Models to make better constrained projections.
Highlights
Whilst models of the Earth System have evolved in response to improvements in our understanding of different processes (Randall et al, 2007), wide differences in the predictions of different models still greatly limit decision making about how best to adapt to climate change (Cox and Stephenson, 2007; Kerr, 2011; Maslin and Austin, 2012)
The terrestrial carbon cycle has major effects on the dynamics of the Earth System over decadal or longer timescales (Denman et al, 2007), and, whilst this means that terrestrial vegetation currently accounts for approximately 60 % of the total annual flux in atmospheric carbon dioxide and absorbs around a quarter of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions (Denman et al, 2007), there is great uncertainty about how this balance will change in the future (Cramer et al, 2001; Friedlingstein et al, 2006; Denman et al, 2007; Sitch et al, 2008)
Our goals were to (i) assess the degree of empirical support for simple functional representations of component processes of the carbon cycle, when assessed within a model of how the overall system is connected; (ii) to assess whether the inferred relationships are consistent with current understanding; and (iii) to define a methodology by which we can build on from this model to identify the appropriate balance of details for making better constrained probabilistic projections of the carbon cycle into the future
Summary
Whilst models of the Earth System (the thin layer that contains and supports life) have evolved in response to improvements in our understanding of different processes (Randall et al, 2007), wide differences in the predictions of different models still greatly limit decision making about how best to adapt to climate change (Cox and Stephenson, 2007; Kerr, 2011; Maslin and Austin, 2012). The terrestrial carbon cycle has major effects on the dynamics of the Earth System over decadal or longer timescales (Denman et al, 2007), and, whilst this means that terrestrial vegetation currently accounts for approximately 60 % of the total annual flux in atmospheric carbon dioxide and absorbs around a quarter of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions (Denman et al, 2007), there is great uncertainty about how this balance will change in the future (Cramer et al, 2001; Friedlingstein et al, 2006; Denman et al, 2007; Sitch et al, 2008) This uncertainty is largely because models exhibit wide differences in their predictive accuracy (Keenan et al, 2012) and lead to widely diverging and inconsistent projections (Friedlingstein et al, 2006). Our goals were to (i) assess the degree of empirical support for simple functional representations of component processes of the carbon cycle, when assessed within a model of how the overall system is connected; (ii) to assess whether the inferred relationships are consistent with current understanding; and (iii) to define a methodology by which we can build on from this model to identify the appropriate balance of details for making better constrained probabilistic projections of the carbon cycle into the future
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
